[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 171 (Wednesday, September 2, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 54504-54507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-17228]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R06-OAR-2018-0716; FRL-10012-88-Region 6]


Air Plan Approval; Texas; Beaumont-Port Arthur Area Second 
Maintenance Plan for 1997 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act), the 
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving a revision to the 
Texas State Implementation Plan (SIP). The EPA is approving a second 
ten-year maintenance plan for maintaining the 1997 8-hour ozone 
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS or standard) through 2032 
in the Beaumont-Port Arthur (BPA) area.

DATES: This rule is effective on October 2, 2020.

ADDRESSES: The EPA has established a docket for this action under 
Docket ID No. EPA-R06-OAR-2018-0716. All documents in the docket are 
listed on the https://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed in 
the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., 
Confidential Business Information or other information whose disclosure 
is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted 
material, is not placed on the internet. Publicly available docket 
materials are available electronically through https://www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeff Riley, EPA Region 6 Office, 
Infrastructure and Ozone Section, 214-665-8542, [email protected]. 
Out of an abundance of caution for members of the public and our staff, 
the EPA Region 6 office will be closed to the public to reduce the risk 
of transmitting COVID-19. Please call or email the contact listed above 
if you need alternative access to material indexed but not provided in 
the docket.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document ``we,'' ``us,'' and 
``our'' means the EPA.

I. Background

    The background for this action is discussed in detail in our June 
8, 2020 Proposal (85 FR 35041, ``Proposal''). In that document we 
proposed to approve, as a revision to the Texas SIP, an updated 
(second) 1997 ozone NAAQS maintenance plan for the BPA area. On

[[Page 54505]]

February 5, 2019, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) 
submitted the second maintenance plan for the BPA area. The maintenance 
plan is designed to keep the area in attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS 
through the end of the second 10-year maintenance period (2032).
    Our June 8, 2020 Proposal provided a detailed description of the 
revisions \1\ and the rationale for EPA's proposed action, together 
with a discussion of the opportunity to comment. The public comment 
period for the action closed on July 8, 2020. See the docket for this 
rulemaking for a copy of the public comments received and our Proposal 
at 85 FR 35041 for more information.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The revision included motor vehicle emissions budgets 
(MVEBs) for the last year of the maintenance plan (in this case 
2032). Since EPA's current transportation conformity regulation 
requires a regional emissions analysis only during the time period 
beginning one year after a nonattainment designation for a 
particular NAAQS until the effective date of revocation of that 
NAAQS (40 CFR 93.109(c)), a regional emissions analysis using MVEBs 
is not required for conformity determinations for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS because that NAAQS has been revoked (80 FR 12264).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    We received comments on our proposal from two commenters: TCEQ and 
an anonymous citizen. Our responses to the comments are below.

II. Response to Comments

    Comment 1: TCEQ expressed support of EPA's proposed approval of the 
BPA area's second 10-year maintenance plan under the 1997 8-hour ozone 
NAAQS, and stated its intent to withdraw from EPA's consideration both 
the request to redesignate the BPA area to attainment for the revoked 
1-hour ozone standard and the 10-year maintenance plan for the 1-hour 
ozone standard.
    Response 1: EPA appreciates TCEQ's support of our June 8, 2020 
Proposal, and informing us of their plans to withdraw the 1-hour ozone 
standard redesignation request and 10-year maintenance plan for the BPA 
area.
    Comment 2: The Commenter argues that EPA cannot approve maintenance 
plans which rely on emission reductions attributable to Federal mobile 
source control strategies which EPA is actively attempting to roll 
back.
    Response 2: We disagree with the assertion that EPA is taking steps 
to roll back Federal mobile source control strategies. The Commenter 
appears to reference the final rulemaking entitled ``The Safer 
Affordable Fuel Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Final Rule for Model Years 
2021-2026'' (SAFE Rule Part Two). This is the sole example given by the 
Commenter of EPA's alleged rollback of Federal mobile source control 
strategies. This rulemaking was developed by the National Highway 
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and EPA to finalize updated 
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) and greenhouse gas (GHG) 
emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks and establish 
new standards, covering model years 2021 through 2026. See 85 FR 24174 
(April 30, 2020). We note that CAFE and GHG standards are separate and 
distinct from EPA standards for control of criteria pollutants from 
motor vehicles, such as those in the Tier 3 motor vehicle emission and 
fuel standards.\2\ As such, auto manufacturers must simultaneously 
comply with unique requirements under both of these sets of standards, 
as well as any other Federal standards applicable to specific vehicle 
types. The SAFE Rule Part Two does not weaken or affect the regulatory 
framework for any of the Federal mobile source control strategies the 
State of Texas relied upon (e.g. Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 light-duty 
and medium-duty passenger vehicle standards; heavy-duty vehicle 
standards; low sulfur gasoline and diesel standards; National Low 
Emission Vehicle standards; and gasoline volatility standards) for 
nitrogen oxides (NOX) and volatile organic compound (VOC) 
ozone precursor emissions reductions in developing the BPA area's 
second 10-year maintenance plan for the 1997 8-hour ozone NAAQS, and 
therefore the state's reliance upon these standards as valid Federal 
control measures is appropriate for this SIP action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ See 79 FR 23414 (April 28, 2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The SAFE Rule Part Two is a component of a larger proposed 
rulemaking \3\ which also yielded the final action entitled ``The Safer 
Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule Part One: One National 
Program'' (One National Program). See 84 FR 51310 (September 27, 2019). 
The One National Program negates the ability of California and states 
that adopted California's zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate 
and/or GHG emissions standards to enforce such standards. Neither the 
State of Texas nor the BPA area have adopted local tailpipe GHG 
emissions standards or local ZEV mandates; therefore, the One National 
Program rulemaking also does not affect any of the Federal mobile 
source control strategies relied upon by the State of Texas in 
developing the BPA area's second 10-year maintenance plan for the 1997 
8-hour ozone NAAQS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ On August 24, 2018, the EPA and the NHTSA jointly published 
in the Federal Register a notice of proposed rulemaking entitled, 
``The Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule for Model 
Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.'' In the NPRM, EPA 
proposed new GHG standards and NHTSA proposed new CAFE standards for 
model year 2021 to 2026 light duty vehicles. EPA also proposed to 
withdraw the waiver it had previously provided to California for 
that State's model year 2021 to 2025 GHG and ZEV standards under 
section 209 of the Clean Air Act. See 83 FR 42986.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SAFE Rule Part Two will not result in on-road emissions increases 
of NOX or VOCs in the BPA area; however, there may be some 
small NOX and VOC emissions increases in area and point 
source emissions due to potential increases in sales, transport and 
production of gasoline. As was noted by the Commenter, the maintenance 
plan has projected some growth in emissions from these categories. Even 
if this growth is slightly underestimated due to SAFE Rule Part Two 
changes or other reasons, EPA is confident that any such underestimate 
would be substantially less than the overall decreases in 
NOX and VOC emissions that are projected to occur between 
2014 and 2032, which are discussed in the notice of proposed rulemaking 
for this action.
    Contrary to the assertion that EPA is taking steps to roll back 
Federal mobile source control strategies, on January 6, 2020, the 
Administrator signed an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 
soliciting pre-proposal comments on the Clean Truck Initiative (CTI), 
which, if finalized, would tighten NOX emissions standards 
for heavy-duty vehicles for the first time since 2001.
    Finally, we note that Texas has adopted a contingency plan, as part 
of the maintenance plan for the BPA area, to address possible future 
ozone air quality problems, as required by section 175A of the CAA. As 
explained in our June 8, 2020 Proposal, this contingency plan includes 
such contingency measures as EPA deems necessary to assure that the 
state will promptly correct a violation of the NAAQS that occurs after 
redesignation of the area to attainment of the NAAQS. The maintenance 
plan provides that a monitored and certified violation of the NAAQS 
triggers the requirement to consider, adopt, and implement the plan's 
contingency measures. Additionally, in the event that any of the 
Federal measures upon which the State has relied are repealed or 
weakened, the EPA has Clean Air Act authority, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 
7410(k)(5), to require a state to revise an approved SIP if it finds 
that it has become substantially inadequate to maintain the NAAQS. 
Moreover, CAA section 175A provides the EPA discretion to require the 
state to submit a revised SIP should the area fail to maintain the 
NAAQS.

[[Page 54506]]

II. Final Action

    We are approving the second maintenance plan for the 1997 ozone 
NAAQS for the BPA area, submitted by TCEQ on February 5, 2019, as a 
revision to the Texas SIP. This maintenance plan is designed to keep 
the area in attainment of the 1997 ozone NAAQS through the second 10-
year maintenance period. As further explained in our Proposal, we are 
not approving the submitted 2032 NOX and VOC motor vehicle 
emissions budgets (MVEBs) for transportation conformity purposes 
because a regional emissions analysis using MVEBs is not required for 
conformity determinations for the 1997 ozone NAAQS because that NAAQS 
has been revoked. We are finding that the projected emissions inventory 
which reflects these budgets is consistent with maintenance of the 
revoked 1997 ozone standard. This action is being taken under section 
175A of the Act.

III. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP 
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable 
Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in 
reviewing SIP submissions, the EPA's role is to approve state choices, 
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this 
action merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and 
does not impose additional requirements beyond those imposed by state 
law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a ``significant regulatory action'' subject to 
review by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 
12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 
2011);
     Is not an Executive Order 13771 (82 FR 9339, February 2, 
2017) regulatory action because SIP approvals are exempted under 
Executive Order 12866;
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact 
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have federalism implications as specified in 
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based 
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to 
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of section 12(d) of the 
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent 
with the CAA; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to 
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental 
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under 
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian 
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has 
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian 
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose 
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as 
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the 
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally 
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating 
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule, 
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the 
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this action and 
other required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of 
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior 
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for 
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court 
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by November 2, 2020. Filing a 
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule 
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of 
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for 
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness 
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in 
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Incorporation by 
reference, Intergovernmental relations, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 3, 2020.
Kenley McQueen,
Regional Administrator, Region 6.

    For the reasons stated in the preamble, EPA amends 40 CFR part 52 
as follows:

PART 52--APPROVAL AND PROMULGATION OF IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart SS--Texas

0
2. In Sec.  52.2270, in paragraph (e), amend the table ``EPA Approved 
Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas 
SIP'' by adding an entry for ``Beaumont-Port Arthur Second 10-Year 
Maintenance Plan for the 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard.'' at the end of 
the table to read as follows:


Sec.  52.2270   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

[[Page 54507]]



              EPA Approved Nonregulatory Provisions and Quasi-Regulatory Measures in the Texas SIP
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Applicable           State
      Name of SIP provision          geographic or       submittal/     EPA approval date         Comments
                                   nonattainment area  effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
Beaumont-Port Arthur Second 10-   Hardin, Jefferson          2/5/2019  9/2/2020, [Insert
 Year Maintenance Plan for the     and Orange                           Federal Register
 1997 8-hour Ozone Standard.       Counties.                            citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2020-17228 Filed 9-1-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P